I think it's not uncommon for a dev to be faster with one language than another. And for another dev to know the same two languages but be more productive in the opposite direction. (And I am mindful that the bar was much lower for me -- being a temporary hack, my stuff didn't have to integrate fully or have the same level of production manners)
But here are two factors that make me faster in the uncommon language.
You know the usual debugger experience where if you keep stepping or you set a breakpoint and then later realize the interesting part is actually behind you? Which means you have to start your scenario again?
Well, the uncommon language has a recording debugger so you can visit any points in front of or behind you, and see what any variable or return value was. You're not limited by the current stack because the recorder captured every package you told it to from the beginning
Even a third party package...
This means I only have to debug once to find the bug, not n times.
And the language is expressive and pliable enough that this debugger was implemented in the language itself...
And mostly by one guy -- not me of course -- it didn't take a whole company to implement it.
And you know how in some languages like Java if your car (program) starts acting up in LA, you have to update the blueprint, send it to the car factory, build the new car, drive it back to LA, and try the same left turn to see it it still ferks?
With the uncommon language, I can stay in LA and change the car while the engine is still running, n times before the 2nd Java car arrives. The language is Clojure.
I have a friend who told me two separate times without promoting about how great a particular brand of guitar strings are... Both times I reminded him I don't know how to play any instrument.
Sorry. I almost resisted naming the language. But what got to me was my co-worker's complaint was about the very tech that made it possible to launch + save $x mil + save some nights and weekends and holidays for a handful of other devs.
And that the complaint was: the language choice makes it less maintainable (hiring pool is smaller) -- but the two factors I mentioned above actually contribute greatly to maintainability.
My original comment could have just been: "a production support tool can be a place to prototype new features."
And _other_ teams could have used other tech to solve the problem. But for the team that had the context and the responsibility, this was the highest probability shot. After hitting the target, a complaint was not the expectation.
Down votes are interesting when applied to a comment that's an answer to a direct question. (this isn't directed at sd9)
> Down votes are interesting when applied to a comment that's an answer to a direct question.
I suspect it's because your answer was indirect and had a fairly proselytizing tone. I found the information interesting, but it was a somewhat irritating read because it was inverted to demand attention, like a story, rather than being upfront. A better-received comment might have read more like:
"I used Clojure. This was mainly because it's my favorite language, so I could work faster in it, and because it has certain features which make debugging extremely fast. et cetera."
The downvotes I'm assuming are because you replied 303 words to a simple question, with the actual answer at the very end which is frustrating to readers. Not saying what you mentioned wasn't interesting though.
Not everything in life needs to be squeezed for maximum gain. Remembering the names of characters is a lot less important than remembering the lessons learned from the story.
Thanks for giving it a try! The 100 is for the pro plan, by default you should have 10 in your account, but happy to add more, please email me with your account email, and I'll top it up: founders@finetunedb.com - Thanks!
Thats only because your list has different types. Its a badly formed API and if you really need to support that use case then you can use maps and reflection to handle it.
>They aim to achieve this goal through a dual strategy: intercepting in rivers to stop the flow and cleaning up what has already accumulated in the ocean.
Develop tools for health insurance companies to abuse patients. Instead of denying coverage to patients based on real life symptoms, they can deny coverage due to model outputs that are “based” on real life data.
Since these models are black boxes, it’s easy to hide biases within them
Or worse, people with conditions similar to you have shown to develop, so we're going to charge you now for what we think you might develop later.
Same negative attached to pre-crime in policing because people that wear the same clothes, drive the same car, listen to the same music, and other sames have committed crimes, we think you will too. someday
In the USA, health plans aren't allowed to deny coverage to patients based on genetics or pre-existing conditions. They aren't stupid enough to try to break those laws. Employees can't keep a secret. And most of the claims costs are directly passed on to employers (group buyers) anyway, so the major health insurance companies have little direct incentive to deny coverage; with minimum limits on the medical loss ratio it's rather the opposite.
Companies can just not hire you for "culture fit" or something else based on leaked data about your health problems in order to keep their premium payouts low or just to avoid hiring certain types of people (fill in your blank here).
